WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT: THE EIS CASE STUDY

Managing Strategic Change – MGT5218

GUID: 2714028I
Word Count (Exlcuing Table of Content, Diagram, and References): 2,566 words
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................2
DEFINING CHANGE PROBLEM........................................................................................3
Justification of Problems...........................................................................................................3
PESTLE & SWOT Analysis.........................................................................................................4
CHANGE METHODS & TECHNOLOGIES ADOPTED.....................................................5
Business Process Reengineering at EIS..................................................................................5
The EIS Change Network & Influence Map..............................................................................6
Formulation of Change Plan: Lewins 3-Step Model...............................................................6
IMPLEMENTATION OF LEWINS’ 3-STEP MODEL IN EIS..............................................7
Lewins’ 3-Step Model in EIS Change Plan...............................................................................7
Unfreeze: Encourage to Let Go Past and Accept the Newness...........................................8
Change: Moving Process & Involve People.............................................................................9
Refreeze: Continuity, Review & Implementation of Change...............................................10
FURTHER RECOMMENDATION......................................................................................10
Contrasting to Best Practice Case: NHS in 2011..................................................................11
McKinsey 7S for Collaborative Approach..............................................................................12
SUMMARY..........................................................................................................................13
REFERENCES....................................................................................................................14

1
GUID: 2714082I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Organization changes often related to large-scale process of different operation levels
and involved various change actors in organization hierarchy. A holistic approach in
managing the transition and prime leadership quality in championing the change should
be equally considered (Paton, McCalman, and Siebert, 2016). This theory has
adequately pictured the existing change management plan that is implemented by Excel
Impact Services (EIS) in respond to Banking Crisis in 2007/2008. This report follows
critical analysis on the company efforts by identify economic downturn as the change.
Then, it will outline EIS’ change method & implementation process using Lewins’ 3 Step
Model of change process to assess the human dimension management approach. The
method then will be compared to NHS’ 2011 change method as more advanced
adoption Lewins’ model. A follow-up argument on the need to utilize McKinsey 7S
Framework to plan future scenario will be the main lessons and recommendation at the
end.

INTRODUCTION
Excel Impact Service (EIS) was a subsidiary firm under a holding company focused in
providing Health Service Facility led services. Prior to the Banking Crisis in 2007/2008,
EIS relies heavily to the sales department as this function had become the backbone of
this company knowing that 100% of business contribution is coming from sales
transaction. EIS also has remarkable reputation of sustaining best practice to navigate
their business by consistently push 5% average growth rate for five years.

However, the performance has significantly deteriorated as global financial crisis hits.
Retrenchment from public sector spending was difficult to the point that clients’ funding
to the EIS have drastically reduced by up to 20%. A final call was initiated with
dissolution of the EIS from its holding company as the main outcome of this crisis. The
EIS is now new business with aim to develop a brand-new income flow and tailor
strategic transitional plan to recover from the crisis.

2
GUID: 2714082I
DEFINING CHANGE PROBLEM
Justification of Problems
A proposal was raised by the MD to hire Change Partner as a consultant in order
tackled the company’s issues in relation to tame and wicked problems as developed by
leadership scholar, Keith Grint in 2005.

Problems Type of problems Strategic Plans

according to Grint according to MD
Urgent need of new Wicked Contain & reform
business structure established business
Lack of productivity due to Wicked Re engineer business
crisis process to increase
productivity
Low brand awareness Tame Re brand the new
since seperation business
Limited innovation Tame Pursue new business
New orientation wanted Wicked Create sales-led
orientation in company
culture
Need more employee Tame Establish reward system
participation
Figure 1. Classification of Wicked & Tame Problem in EIS using Grint’s theory

Grint (2022) has illustrate his theories by referring that every solution to wicked
problems is a ‘one-shot operation’ as every decision made has significant impact
(p.1521). It can be deduced from Figure 1 that most wicked problems from EIS are a
cultural change problem. Hence, it’s crucial for EIS leader to encourage collaborative
approaches to achieve said strategic plans.

3
GUID: 2714082I
PESTLE & SWOT Analysis
A concise PESTLE & SWOT Analysis to determine change methods and plan is
necessary to provide systematic and comprehensive internal and external reflection in
healthcare industry (Visconti, 2016) as exhibit in Figure 2.

4
GUID: 2714082I
 Figure 2. External PESTLE & Internal SWOT analysis for EIS

Political and Economic aspects may give downturn to the company so clear advocacy
plan to government and investor is paramount. EIS should incorporate Technology
advancement in its system as it presents opportunity to innovate. Looking at number of
resources as EIS’ strength, the ability to boost EIS performance is possible if each
stakeholder is well-managed.

CHANGE METHODS & TECHNOLOGIES ADOPTED

Business Process Reengineering at EIS
In conjunction to the change network program, an intensive Business Process
Reengineering project called ‘1 Business’ was established. The BPR project seems
effective to solve human resource problem, create tactical planning, and develop project
management guidelines to ensure seamless organization change (Grover et. al., 1995).
The BPR employed specific role such as Change Leader, Visio mapper, Process owner,
reengineering team, steering committee, and reengineering czar. The roles described
are quite penitential to seek dramatic improvement by drastically redesign the
organization (Guha et. al., 1993).

The EIS Change Network & Influence Map

24 change teams were made with designated leader in charged on each team. The
large number of teams created seems to trigger large amount of change supporters,
knowing it’s important to build powerful coalition to ensure massive impact from the
transformation (Kotter, 1995). Rather than one change leader, the goal is to established
network Change Leaders. Looking at Figure 3, it is important to note that while the
Change Networks team is the one actively developing innovation culture, they only hold
medium power of the organization. Senior managers, the Government, and BoD holds
latent powers as they appear less to the process but are part to the decision making.

5
GUID: 2714082I
 Figure 3. EIS’s stakeholder matrix

Formulation of Change Plan: Lewins 3-Step Model

A set of success criterion was settled by the MD for the Change Partner to analyze.
Appointed Change Partner shall diagnose the current culture and identify cultural
‘blockers and ‘enabler’. A corporate report called ‘The Case for change’ will be used as
foundation to unfolds new strategic direction. The main output to this consultancy is
some advice on rebranding, Business Process Re-engineering approach, and
establishment of rich collaboration culture.

From practical perspective, what the EIS has done has fell into what we call Lewins’ 3-
Step Model as illustrated in Figure 4. EIS’ change management plan appears to be
more linear rather than a circulating method as proposed by McKinsey 7s Model.

The EIS starts by assessing the culture and generating new culture as a response to
the company’s separation by setting the urgency of change among the employees. This
phase is commonly difficult as people may perceived this process as breaking an old
habit (Burnes, 2019). The EIS then move to change process consist of problem
identifying with research-based action is expected from it (Burnes, 2019). The refreeze

6
GUID: 2714082I
process is all about put newly adopted changes into permanent state (Burnes, 2019)
and the EIS seeks top-level review or monitoring to sustain the changes.

Figure 4. EIS linear change plan represented using Lewins 3-Step Model

IMPLEMENTATION OF LEWINS’ 3-STEP MODEL IN EIS

Lewins’ 3-Step Model in EIS Change Plan
The EIS may provide series of change plan, but it is drawn in to three big pictures as the
umbrella of each step. It focuses more in encouraging everyone to innovates and
embrace the company’s structure change due to the Banking Crisis impact. Adopting
Lewins’ 3-Step Model in the change plan puts high rationality in each process (Burnes,
2019). The easy-to-follow visual languages allow the Leader to understand their working
through changes.

Unfreeze: Encourage to Let Go Past and Accept the Newness

The first three episodes–Setting the Scene, Team Building through meeting, and
Identify Change Problem–are crucial in encouraging to release past behavior. The aim
is to embrace the new structure and triggers the innovation culture to recover from the
crisis. Emphasizing the ‘why’ part from the Leaders is important to set the scene.
According to Caldwell (2003), top attributes for Change Leaders is inspiring vision and
entrepreneurship (p.288). These key attributes are needed in the first phase to build

7
GUID: 2714082I
psychological thinking of getting inspired by the change and innovate better to push
company’s performance.

Inaugural team meeting is necessary to build group dynamic. The output should give
the Change Leaders’ some understanding on their member behavior towards the
change (Brunes, 2019). In this phase, general discussion of change process, clear role
of team members, creation of communication plan, and specific discussion on change
objectives and the EIS’ organization value must be clearly emphasized. It is crucial that
the Change Managers to have key attributes of empowering others, team building, and
learning from others (Caldwell, 2003) to convince the members.

The last episode in this phase is to gain collective mindset of a change problem. As the
Change Leaders articulate their vision and build communal value to embrace the
change, employees should now be ready to make joint efforts in innovating and deliver
outcomes (Jung, Chow, and Wu, 2003). To go through that, EIS Change Network shall
reach to an agreement plan then Change Leader will seek support from Change Mentor
to deliver their proposal.

Change: Moving Process & Involve People

The ‘moving’ process allow the Change Networks team to develop feasibility plan,
design, and research their assumption, and present their proposal to key stakeholder. In
this phase, team participation in change management workshop that is facilitated by the
Change Manager should articulate clear feasibility plan. Serial activities such as
discussion, assessment through change problem, identify change barriers and
identification of stakeholder are the main purpose of this workshop. Psychological safety
should be felt by each member by approaching crisis/conflict in positive way, building
respect, anticipate feedback, and plan counter feedback (Delizonna, 2022).

In post feasibility development plan, the phase is getting tougher as member should test
their assumption to make an informed business case. The ‘what’, ‘why’, and ‘how’
aspects have been identified so the change project looks more convincing than before.
8
GUID: 2714082I
A deep researching period about the proposed change plan is essential in Lewin’s
model who refers it as Action Research (AR). A dialogic action research is suitable to
this phase as the objective is to determine the best practice in communicating the
change which requires critical engagement from organizations and related communities
(Maurer & Githens, 2010).

The well-researched feasibility plan and business case now has defined change
problem, solid arguments to adopt new culture, resources illustration to deliver the
change, and outline of change’s benefit. It is important to also determine the Return of
Investment, be it in monetary or cultural to win over key stakeholders. At best, ROI
should relate to the initial KPI that the organization aspire to be. Afterward, a key
stakeholders’ presentation is monumental for plan approval. This may be a back-and-
forth process as the aim is to collect constructive feedback so the team can refine the
presentation.

The final part of managing the change is when Board-level presentation is conducted.
Note that the senior people in the organization as the main audience, this phase should
be perceived as prestigious to some members. Hence, if it done properly, recognized
the team efforts is influential to build motivation and give long-lasting sense of belonging
to the project.

Refreeze: Continuity, Review & Implementation of Change

Once the board agree to the plan, this is the end task of the change team. Future
leaders should be shortlisted to lead the change project team. Previous Change
Leaders can serve as mentor to the upcoming project leader. With this way, a circular
learning system between past change team with the current leaders will create new
collaborative culture.

Implementation and review the changes are key activities to ensure the change
continuity. A scheduled assessment in form of focus group or small meeting to evaluate
the change program is necessary. The EIS also conduct survey and 360-degree
9
GUID: 2714082I
assessment to monitor the successful change process. A new sub-board called
‘Change project implementation board’ is beneficial to oversee the change process and
report errors or misconduct along the way of implementation process.

This phase is critical since high levels should be able to show commitment in adopting
new culture. Transformational type of leadership is the basic principle that leader should
adopt as it shows significance in supporting the innovation within organization (Jung,
Chow, and Wu, 2003). Leaders with high spirit in embracing the change and support
the implementation is the key to sustain the new changes and turn it into new company
values.

FURTHER RECOMMENDATION
From critical analysis of EIS change plan, it appears that EIS need a more collaborative
culture to innovate and recover from financial crisis. This problem is more cultural and
technical as it requires integration from each division and well-tested change plan in the
future. Therefore, the recommendation is to analyze the change using McKinsey 7S
model as it can trigger the leader mindset into adopting collaborative culture. However,
a best practice case from NHS is seen to be quiet similar with EIS’ Lewins model but it
provides more emphasize in testing the ideas beforehand since Investing the time to
test ideas is key to change improvement.

Contrasting to Best Practice Case: NHS in 2011

The NHS has experienced long term underfunding since 2010. Their budget has not
been secured resulting major cuts off to healthcare frontliners (NHS Support Federation,
2021). The NHS seek a large-scale improvement tool using the PDSA Cylce (Figure 5)
to test change ideas in a small scale, which can be incorporate to the EIS’ Lewins’
model.

10
GUID: 2714082I
 Figure 5. NHS Improvement PDSA Cycles (2011)

Plan the trial: This phase is similar to EIS’ unfreeze phase as it focus in define the
objective and stating the scope. What makes it crucial is that this phase clearly describe
the amount of time PDSA will be implemented and the 5W1H aspects of change plan
(NHS Improving Quality, 2011).

Do: Gather as much feedback is key to carry out the change plan. This is the phase to
gather collective awareness regarding the change and plant motivation, reassurance,
and encouragement to build collaborative communities (NHS Improving Quality, 2011).

Study: Research and review existing information from before, during, and post change
process. It is important to be as reflective when analyzing the change ideas.

Act: Be open to possibility of modify or retest the plan. The act part is not only to
implement and evaluate the change plan but also assess to what extent the ideas
should be tested or to determine how long the change process should be extended.
This part is quiet different than what EIS has done as it does not emphasize the
flexibility go back-and-forth in testing the ideas.

11
GUID: 2714082I
McKinsey 7S for Collaborative Approach
The EIS can also take leverage on McKinsey’s 7S model to drive collaborative aspect
from each factors affecting organizational change in response to the economic crisis as
pictured in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Recommendation to adopt McKinsey 7S model in EIS cultural change project

Hard S
Structure: The EIS focus on top-down chain of command with the Board of Director
being the latent stakeholder. To advocate the change, a clear role of EIS Change
Network consist of managers, leaders, mentors, and team members.

Strategy: The EIS faced dilemma after company separation from the holding company.
Economic impact is the main trigger of change due to the Banking Crisis and unstable
investment. The EIS opted to build 24 Change Initiatives to innovate and reach
economic stability.

12
GUID: 2714082I
System: The EIS considers ‘1 Business’ project as intensive Business Process
Reengineering project to establish project board, facilitate mapping workshop, and
managing the changes. The EIS is in position to innovate and perform some trials and
errors to achieve more productivity.

Soft S
Skills: The EIS shall consider its highly skilled leaders, reengineering, sales, and
branding team out of its 8,000 employees to plan innovations in each field.

Staff: In administering the changes, EIS can build special task force consist of highly
skilled 240 managers across divisions.

Style: Due to demand to innovate, the changes network team creates high collaborative
style to get the job done.

Shared Values: Members adopt The EIS Way principle to lead transformational change
project that has been developed by Change Partner.

SUMMARY
The EIS has adopted Lewins’ 3-Step Model in managing cultural change within the
organization. The main change driver is coming from the external force because of
Banking Crisis in 2007/2008. A sense of collaborative culture is the primary needs for
EIS to improve innovation to attract investor and survived as newly independent
company. The EIS has high employee resources and focus on creating innovative
culture to recover and survived the industry as notable health service firm. Therefore,
the EIS adopt Lewins’ to oversee the change plan by providing linear change plan
strategy focusing on improve employee motivation to innovate. An alternative to
consider McKinsey 7S Model is also recommended as it emphasizes on setting
innovative culture by synergizing collaboration from a more well-rounded aspect.
Testing ideas is important as reflected to NHS as best practice example.

13
GUID: 2714082I
REFERENCES

Burnes, B. (2019) “The origins of lewin’s three-step model of change,” The Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 56(1), pp. 32–59. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886319892685.

Caldwell, R. (2003) “Change leaders and change managers: Different or

complementary?,” Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(5), pp.
285–293. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730310485806.

Delizona, L. (2022) High-performing teams need psychological safety: Here's how to

create it, Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-
performing-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it

Grint, K. (2022) “Critical essay: Wicked problems in the age of uncertainty,” Human
Relations, 75(8), pp. 1518–1532. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267211070770.

Grover, V. et al. (1995) “The implementation of business process

reengineering,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(1), pp. 109–144.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1995.11518072.

Guha, S., Kettinger, W.J. and Teng, J.T.C. (1993) “Business process
reengineering,” Information Systems Management, 10(3), pp. 13–22. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/10580539308906939.

Jung, D.I., Chow, C. and Wu, A. (2003) “The role of transformational leadership in
enhancing organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary
findings,” The Leadership Quarterly, 14(4-5), pp. 525–544. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(03)00050-x.

Kotter, J. (1995) “Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail,” Harvard Business
Review, 28(3), p. 121. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(95)91633-
4.
14
GUID: 2714082I
NHS Improving Quality (2011) First Step Towards Quality Improvement: A Simple
Guide to Improving Services. NHS. Available at:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/improvement-hub/publication/first-steps-towards-
quality-improvement-a-simple-guide-to-improving-services/ (Accessed: December
15, 2022).

NHS Support Federation (2021) Who is to blame for the NHS funding crisis, a funding
squeeze is leaving the NHS overwhelmed, FUND OUR NHS. Available at:
https://nhsfunding.info/nhs-crisis-making/ (Accessed: December 14, 2022).

Maurer, M. and Githens, R.P. (2010) “Toward a reframing of action research for Human
Resource and Organization Development,” Action Research, 8(3), pp. 267–292.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750309351361.

Paton, R., McCalman, J. and Siebert, S. (2016) Change management: A guide to

effective implementation. Los Angeles (Calif.): SAGE.

Ravanfar, M.M. (2015) “Analyzing organizational structure based on 7s model of

McKinsey,” International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social
Sciences, 5(5). Available at: https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v5-i5/1591.

Senge, P.M. (1997) “The fifth discipline,” Measuring Business Excellence, 1(3), pp. 46–
51. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb025496.

Visconti, R.M. (2016) “Healthcare public-private partnerships in Italy: Assessing risk

sharing and governance issues with Pestle and SWOT analysis,” Corporate
Ownership and Control, 13(4), pp. 122–131. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv13i4p12.

15
GUID: 2714082I